Okay thanks, that is one side of the argument.
Are there any articles from the other side of the argument?
reply
There have been some arguments against in the pull-req I linked to in this submission. I'd suggest you read those comments.
Note that at the moment, all arguments against full-RBF on the basis of protecting unconfirmed transactions are invalid: with >70% of hash power mining full-RBF, it's technically trivial to replace any transaction by simply double-spending it with a higher fee.
reply
Good point.
reply
that was a great read. I didn’t know what RBF was and now I definitely do!
Full-RBF reduces legal risks for all miners. We want to clearly set the standard that miners can mine what they want, and aren’t responsible for protecting users from unconfirmed double-spends.
that seems like a very good case for miners.
but, he said at the beginning of the article that he would explain the arguments against it. But, I didn’t see that. What the arguments against full-RBF?
reply
Arguments against full-RBF are here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28132
reply